Will your head literally explode? OED recognizes informal use of "literally" - Atheist Nexus2018-02-22T07:11:23Zhttp://atheistnexus.org/forum/topics/will-your-head-literally-explode-oed-recognizes-informal-use-of?groupUrl=linguaphiles&commentId=2182797%3AComment%3A2290737&x=1&feed=yes&xn_auth=noHehehe.tag:atheistnexus.org,2013-08-24:2182797:Comment:22907372013-08-24T14:33:01.970ZIdaho Spudhttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/IdahoSpud
<p>Hehehe.</p>
<p>Hehehe.</p> I like your thought Keith. F…tag:atheistnexus.org,2013-08-24:2182797:Comment:22905872013-08-24T14:00:24.916ZIdaho Spudhttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/IdahoSpud
<p>I like your thought Keith. For many years I've had the idea that communication is hard enough without people constantly changing the meanings of words.</p>
<p>I like your thought Keith. For many years I've had the idea that communication is hard enough without people constantly changing the meanings of words.</p> The more we allow words to me…tag:atheistnexus.org,2013-08-24:2182797:Comment:22905022013-08-24T06:42:04.002ZKeith Brian Johnsonhttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/KeithBrianJohnson
<p>The more we allow words to mean what they don't mean, the less language means anything at all.</p>
<p>The more we allow words to mean what they don't mean, the less language means anything at all.</p> I'm with you, preferring to s…tag:atheistnexus.org,2013-08-23:2182797:Comment:22901582013-08-23T05:13:25.490ZGrinning Cathttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/GrinningCat
<p>I'm with you, preferring to see "literally" used strictly! I find the sense of "figuratively" grating, compromising what ought to be a straightforward, useful word.</p>
<p>It's true that the sense we're objecting to has been around for longer than the United States. One of several examples from the 1760s: <em>"He is a fortunate man to be introduced to such a party of fine women at his arrival; it is literally to feed among the lilies."</em> <font size="1">(Frances Brooke, <em>The History of…</em></font></p>
<p>I'm with you, preferring to see "literally" used strictly! I find the sense of "figuratively" grating, compromising what ought to be a straightforward, useful word.</p>
<p>It's true that the sense we're objecting to has been around for longer than the United States. One of several examples from the 1760s: <em>"He is a fortunate man to be introduced to such a party of fine women at his arrival; it is literally to feed among the lilies."</em> <font size="1">(Frances Brooke, <em>The History of Emily Montague,</em> Vol. IV (1769), p. 175, quoted in "<a href="http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002611.html" target="_blank">Literally: a History</a>" at <em>Language Log</em>)</font></p> I don't care what Oxford indi…tag:atheistnexus.org,2013-08-22:2182797:Comment:22899702013-08-22T18:28:56.696ZIdaho Spudhttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/IdahoSpud
<p>I don't care what Oxford indicates. I still very much dislike the incorrect usage of the word "literally".</p>
<p>I don't care what Oxford indicates. I still very much dislike the incorrect usage of the word "literally".</p> Well, that is "literally" a b…tag:atheistnexus.org,2013-08-22:2182797:Comment:22899572013-08-22T18:04:18.777ZDonna Darkohttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/DonnaD
<p>Well, that is "literally" a bite in the ass! </p>
<p>Well, that is "literally" a bite in the ass! </p>